27 October 2009

SJ ballpark EIR to slip to January

Over at the SJ/SV Business Journal, Katherine Conrad reports that flawed traffic projections in the original 2006 environmental impact report will force a revisiting of that subject. Key to this is traffic on the stretch of 280 between 10th/11th streets and Guadalupe Pkwy (CA-87), an area that frequently sees congestion on Sharks game nights.
Dennis Korabiak, the city’s program manager for transportation, said the city had planned to release an addendum to the 2006 environmental report on the stadium in November. Now, however, the city must do a “focused” report using the new and correct information. The size of the stadium being considered now is considerably smaller — 32,000 seats compared to the earlier 45,000 seats — which could could mean a wash in terms of the potential difference between the flawed traffic impact estimate and what a new report will show.
The original EIR had its critics, chiefly Marc Morris of the Shasta/Hanchett Neighborhood Association. Morris felt the methodology was flawed and didn't include a large enough survey around the site, especially of surface streets. Given that 280 is the main artery downtown and especially for fans coming from outside San Jose, the best practice might be to capture data from 101/680 all the way to 880/Valley Fair, plus data from W San Carlos, Park, and Julian.

I'm curious to hear what the other traffic critic, HP Pavilion management, thinks of this. They've been rather silent so far.

Revising the report will mean it won't be released until January. That means two things. First, don't expect much news emanating from San Jose until then. Second, ballpark news on this site might be originating from Oakland.

FWIW, I'm trying to make the next Good Neighbor meeting on Thursday, in part to see how much coverage this issue gets.


Anonymous said...

Why do you suggest ML that news till January will most likely come out of Oakland? Aren't you giving Oakland or nothing partisans a false sense of hope with such commentary?
And can we expect to hear from the MLB committee in this lifetime? Seriously, they must have come to a conclusion regarding the Bay Area by now.

Marine Layer said...

I expect to get some kind of concept or proposal from Oakland. I'll be extremely disappointed if that doesn't happen, given the task force(s) Oakland has put together just for this purpose.

We might hear from the MLB committee. But I think they'll time the release of the report in order to elicit the best response.

Dan said...

I'll be highly surprised if we hear anything new out of Oakland for a good long time. Seems they've got bigger issues right now like legalizing sideshows.

As for the EIR, it's amusing that they have to redo it. They under estimated the traffic that would be brought in by a 45,000 seat baseball park, but the new stadium is only 32,000 seats now which would reduce the amount of traffic anyway. Seems a waste of money to me seeing that even if they underestimated traffic for a 45,000 seat stadium, now that the stadium is 13,000 seats smaller traffic will drop well below their bad estimate.

Jeffrey said...

It'd be great to hear something out of Oakland. I just hope it is something realistic and not repackaged versions of ruled out sites. Maybe they'll tear down the Forest City stuff!!!!

I know, I know... that is sort of ruled out by the whole "something realistic" statement above.

Anonymous said...

ML 11:04,
I.E. The Winter Meetings?
Completely agree with your post Dan; 13k less is probably a lesser impact on traffic than the flawed analysis. Probably by law they have to waste money studying 32k vs 45k.

Anonymous said...

Great ... now we have time for Oakland to put it's best foot forward. I still say it's a waste of money to do anything but remodel the current coliseum. When the Raiders leave, this could be configured to baseball only and you already have parking and mass transit available.

Anything else is a waste of money.

Jeffrey said...

You know, as I try and pencil it out in my head... the whole Raiders deal is such a stupid deal that the people of Oakland should be embarrassed that some of the guys who made it happen are still their representatives.

Remodeling the Coliseum to be baseball only doesn't even work financially because it means that the city is paying 20 million per year for something that doesn't exist. So basically, before any financing model is discussed the city is already sinking 20 million into the joint.

Marine Layer said...

Not that it's analogous, but Seattle/King County are still paying off the debt on the Kingdome, nearly a decade after it was demolished. Nowadays there'd be no way to back door a deal to do this in Oakland the way it was done in Seattle (or the way it was done in Oakland to build Mt. Davis).

gojohn10 said...

The "back door": that is certainly what Oakland got with the Raider deal.

Anonymous said...

I think its overly optimistic to think that in 3 months Oakland will have something to show.

Pork chops and applesauce said...

It seems even Wolff is concerned how long its taking the MLB committee to release its findings.

Wolff said yesterday at the SJ Chamber's A's/Earthquakes mixer, "We'll hear something in the next few decades." to a room full of laughs.

Also, it was odd that the stadium presentation video shown at the event only had the Earthquakes' new home in SJ, not the A's.

Dan said...

Probably because until the A's stadium is given the official green light in SJ by MLB any discussion of it is academic. Basically everyone is now waiting on the Blue Ribbon panel to reveal they've figured out Oakland is a dead end or not and then we can move on. But until then no one can do anything.

The Quakes stadium however is just a few mil short of shovels being in the ground and every opportunity to show folks with money (like at a chamber event) what they could be sponsoring at, is a chance to close that funding gap.

Anonymous said...

I think they should expand Railey Field and change locations with the Rivercats. The 'Cats draw better than Oakland and it would cost way less to expand that facility then re-do the coliseum.

Anonymous said...

Bud Selig couldn't figure his way out of a paper bag if given a pair of scissors---the guy is the most useless commish ever in baseball--he will be remembered for the black mark on baseball by ignoring the steriods era until he was forced to take action---what sanctions did MLB ever do to the Giants for knowingly allowing BB to use 'roids---None---and if you recall BS (appropriate initials) couldn't talk enough about what their punishment would be once he figured it out---He is Useless---

VTA rider said...

All the computer models and formulas for traffic flow and loads are already available, thanks to the old EIR. How long would it take to plug in the new numbers for a smaller stadium?

Or is the problem that the original EIR consultants fudged their formulas so extensively that now they have to be redone from scratch?

Who did the work the first time, and who is doing it now?

Anonymous said...

Pork sauce,
Sounds like Wolff was merely playing the role of comedian at the COC event, not showing genuine concern. In fact, he probably wouldn't be joking around if he was truly concerned about the committee's report.
Patience is a virtue my friend.

bruno said...

so... is mlb going to vote at THIS winter meeting for the San Jose okay? or is that next year? to be honest with you, i'm getting soo impatient with all of this, i think i'm going to stop being an A's fan overall and just be a fan of baseball. i'm just saying...

Anonymous said...

I'm always quite amused by the random "Bud" bashing that occurs from time to time. For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone would really think he's a fool.

He inherits a league fractured by infighting among the owners, a horrible labor situation, complicated by a collusion scandal and a horrific strike. So what does he do? He achieves relative labor peace, culls the herd in ownership circles, brings the league back from the precipice of financial disaster, revamps the playoff format, and succeeds in having new parks built or renovated for almost every team in the league.

Hardly the resume of an incompetent fool. Has he had some miscues along the way? Without a doubt. Has his reign been good for baseball? Also, without a doubt. All things considered, his leadership of MLB may exceed that of Landis when it's all said and done.

He may "plod along", but in the end, he gets things done. Not an easy task in such a traditional hide-bound organization as MLB, where the DH rule is still being argued 40 years after its inception.

Bud will be meticulous. He may be slow. He may be obstinate. But at the end of the day, if there's something he wants, my money's on him.

Without a doubt, we know that he wants something done with the A's. Exactly what that "something" consists of is the question we should concern ourselves with. If Selig decides the A's future is in SJ, then I figure it's only a matter of time.


Anonymous said...

Jeff 7:57,
Considering Selig had no comment regarding San Jose a few months back and, well, it appears he KNOWS THE WAY!
It also doesn't hurt that him and Wolff go way back.

Anonymous said...

Jeff - I think it's because people don't realize for whom Bud works. They seem to think he works for the fans. So when things don't go their way, they feel he is incompetent. He works for the owners. The owners, as a group, are making huge amounts of money and most of them have been successful in getting their municipalities to pay for new stadia. They also have nothing to gain by having steroids become a bigger issue than they already have. Thus, it's all swept under the rug as expeditiously as possible. None of those things make him incompetent. On the contrary, they make him very good at doing his masters' bidding.

Anonymous said...


Then I suppose it's been a matter of time for about 20 years now.

Ezra said...

Sure Selig has done some things that worked out well. But there's so many things he's been wrong on that they just keep plodding along with that it's rediculous. The man didn't handle the Montréal Expos relocation well (moving a team to a city that begrudgingly built a stadium that most people say is not a very good stadium with a perennially loosing team with low fan support - look at their TV numbers from 3 posts ago). Do you really think he's going to handle relocating the A's any better?

Jesse said...

ML, the owners have a quarterly meaeting in November after the world series before Thanksgiving, any chance they'll vote on territorial rights?

Anonymous said...

It's really quite simple: the Nationals put a winning product on the field and attendance/TV ratings will go up in DC. This isn't rocket science. Also, give Nationals Park a break: it's a fine facility that I'd take over the Coliseum any day.
By the way, moving a team thousands of miles/across an international border is a different animal than 40 miles/across a county line. Selig should do just fine with the A's move.

Anonymous said...


Me thinks you may be missing the point. Selig managed to save a failing franchise, a feat in and of itself. What's more, someone else footed the bill. I think you're proving my point.

Besides, given time to develop some talent, DC may yet turn into the baseball town of old. Time will tell. In the meantime, the owners continue to rack up the coin.


Anonymous said...

Bud is horrible---look at the disparity between rich and poor teams---football has figured it out---hockey and basketball have figured it out---baseball is a joke with the rich spending 4-5x on salaries than the smaller "minor league" farm teams---of which the A's are one--

A's moving to SJ---never happen---because Bud can't figure it out--come on--Wolff is in his early 70's--this dance has been going on for the past 5-years---its been a year since Bud said that they were free to look at other markets--his blue ribbon commission was supposed to report in August---than September---October...November...never...anyone--

Success is all about timing---BS has missed the window of opportunity for SJ---because he couldn't make a decision-

Marine Layer said...

Jesse - Short answer is no. They won't do anything until the deal is sewn up, as in voter approved. That's a year from now.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:20,
For heavens sake, just cease with you non-coherent babbling. Don't you have some sideshow to attend to?

FC said...


What's the process going forward from here? Assuming the Blue Ribbon panel comes back with a recommendation in favor of the A's, does the focus then shift to the elections? I kind of remember someone talking about a "chicken and the egg" scenerio, where SJ wouldn't move forward without a commitment from MLB, and visa versa.

Marine Layer said...

That's a bad assumption to make. Don't expect MLB to make the decision and wait for a year while the process continues with no semblance of a guarantee.

LeAndre said...

Anon 12:06,

probably one of the most ignorant things I've seen on this goodness

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:06--gotta love your boy Bud welcoming steriod boy McGuire back into the that's the leadership your talking about!!

Anonymous said...

Blaming Bud Selig for the financial disparity between is ludicrous. It has always been there.

We need a salary cap, something that probably won't happen, but you can't blame bud for mlb not having one, the players wont ever approve one - we'd more than likely need a lockout or another season-destroying strike.

That's the thing that concerns me about the new stadium issue (believe me, I am all for it) - it is not the financial saviour that some make it out to be - if it were, why cant the Indians hang on to Sabbathia and Clif Lee, why are the Twins preparing for the eventual departure of favorite son Joe Mauer, even as their new yard is being built?

It's because the BoSux and Bankees have limitless funds to spend. And you cant blame that on Bud.

Ezra said...

@ Anonymous 7:04

You could say the same thing about their location in Montréal (support was up when the team was doing well in the early 90s). You really think DC is the only city that will support a winning team? There are plenty of cities that would do that, without having to move a team to a city that has already failed twice.

And sure, Nat Park is better than arguably the worst stadium in the MLB. Great point... But it's not better than about 90% of the other stadiums. This isn't just my opinion, but the opinion of the everyone that I've heard talking about the stadium.

@ Anonymous Jeff

I don't see how Selig has saved a failing franchise. All he has done is relocated a failing franchise to a new city where it continues to be a failing franchise (out of 30, the Nats were: 24th in attendance, 30th in TV viewership, and 30th in overall record).

I certainly hope that DC does turn into the baseball town of old and that the team will leave DC for the 3rd time. Maybe then they'll get the point.

John P. said...

I certainly hope that DC does turn into the baseball town of old.

"The baseball town of old" sounds more like a curse than a compliment, to me.

The original Washington franchise (now Minnesota) drew a million just once (in 1946; they never did it when Walter Johnson was around), and the second franchise (now Texas) never managed to do it at all. That was over a span of 71 years.

DC has always been a horrible basebll town, as far as I can tell.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:20- "Blaming Bud Selig for the financial disparity between is ludicrous. It has always been there." What's ludicrous is that he has done nothing about it---NHL bit the bullet and made changes...NFL had to make changes...which is why the Steelers can compete---what is the role of a commissioner than to tackle the tough issues and develop a solution for the health of the sport?

Anonymous said...

"Washington, First in War, First in Peace, Last in the American League".

True enough about the Senators of old. But still, they were consistently a second division team. Times have changed rather dramatically, so if they can put a decent product on the field....who knows? It's still a better alternative than Montreal.


Anonymous said...

You mention that the NHL and NFL bit the bullet and made changes so that there was more of a level playing field.

You know, as do I, that those changes consist primarily of a hard salary cap.

Again, to put the lack of a salary cap on Bud Selig is ludicrous.

Please, tell me how I am wrong here. I am no Bud fan, but it's silly to blame Selig for the lack of a cap.

Tell me. How is he going to get the players to accept a hard salary cap (as well as a floor for owners, so they cant just pocket all of their revenues?).

Tell me what Selig can do to implement a hard salary cap.

Others have shown in this thread what he has done to approve the health of the sport to the point where the owners (the people he works for) are swimming in profits.

As fans, you (I assume) and I have a different definition of what constitutes the good health of MLB, namely a level playing field for all teams, but I think the owners who are showing huge profits, and the players who have sugar daddy teams like the Bankees and BoSux shelling out huge dollars to free agents, like things the way they are and the health of the league is green....errrr fine.

One last point - you brought up the NHL as an example of biting the bullet - well that is a totally diferrent ballgame, as the NHL, without the hard cap and restructuring of the collective bargaining agreement was (and still may be) on the verge of losing teams to financial ruin...

Tony D. said...

OT R.M.,
Just recently noticed that the A's/Earthquakes were now members of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Don't think this happens if the A's weren't planning on becoming permanent residents of the South Bay.